Nsca Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421489121
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Cedar Rapids, IA, USA
Phone
3193666722
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Job Training

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$170,678
Expenses
$99,837
Assets
$732,758
Liabilities
$272,210

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SIMMEN LAUREN (PRESIDENT)
  • PAYNE DAWNA (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • WILSON CHARLES R (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • LEBLANC THOMAS (NSCA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LEBLANC THOMAS (NSCA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $156,930 total reported compensation
  • WILSON CHARLES R (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $104,751 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the nsca education foundation, herein the foundation, is to advance educational opportunities by providing scholarships and awards to assist existing professionals and those pursuing careers within the low-voltage electronic systems integration industry. The foundation is committed to the growth of the industry by providing access to the best education and latest techniques available. The foundation promotes and engages current and future electronic systems integrators in educational experiences to enhance the growth, professionalism and business skills needed in the electronic systems industry.

What it reported doing in 2024

Pass: the pass story is one born out of concern and commitment for school safety. When a school system makes an investment in security, we want to help them make sure their money is spent on the right solutions. Pass brings together members of the security industry, school officials, and law enforcement to develop a coordinated approach to protecting k-12 students and staff by creating safety standards for k-12.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 44% for direct work, and 56% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.4%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 83.6%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 41.5%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.34; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.37; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.2%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.2% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.4% of revenue deployed · 83.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $83K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $157K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.